Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:22:35 +0900 | From | Yoshinori Sato <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 06/17] h8300: CPU depend helpers |
| |
At Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:54:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Monday 27 April 2015 14:35:13 Yoshinori Sato wrote: > > +static struct platform_device sci0_device = { > > + .name = "sh-sci", > > + .id = 0, > > + .resource = sci0_resources, > > + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(sci0_resources), > > + .dev = { > > + .platform_data = &sci0_platform_data, > > + }, > > +}; > > + > > +static struct platform_device sci1_device = { > > + .name = "sh-sci", > > + .id = 1, > > + .resource = sci1_resources, > > + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(sci1_resources), > > + .dev = { > > + .platform_data = &sci1_platform_data, > > + }, > > +}; > > You should generally not define 'platform_device' structure statically. > Generally, all new architectures should pass a dtb blob from the > boot loader that contains the device definitions outside of the > kernel binary. > > If you don't expect to use h8300 with a lot of external peripherals, > you can also use platform_device_register_simple() and related functions > to register the platform device here, which lets you remove the > static definition.
OK.
> > +void __init early_device_init(void) > > +{ > > + early_platform_add_devices(early_devices, > > + ARRAY_SIZE(early_devices)); > > +} > > I would like to eventually remove the early_platform_add_devices() > interface, and use some other mechanism here. Can you try either using > devicetree to probe those devices like ARM does, or just calling into > the drivers manually?
I think it's better to do after a while to DT, so it's considered.
> In case of the sci, using the new 'earlycon' framework is probably the > best idea, and for the timer, just call the probe() function directly > instead of going through the whole early_platform_add_devices > and early_platform_driver_probe() dance. > > Arnd >
OK. Thanks.
-- Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>
| |